The Indonesian Parliament after Two Elections: What has Really Changed?

Dr Stephen Sherlock

Dr Sherlock's paper follows from a study on the structure and operation of the Indonesian parliament (Dewan Perwakilan Raykat (DPR)) commissioned by CDI and published in 2003. The 2003 paper described the role, composition and structure of the DPR and made an assessment of its effectiveness as an institution in the context of the rapidly changing political scene in Indonesia after the fall of the Suharto regime. The paper concluded that great changes had occurred in Indonesian politics and that the DPR was part of those changes and was being forced to accommodate to continuing change. But it was also argued that the DPR was heavily marked by the traditions, procedures and practices of authoritarianism and that popular opinions about the Members of the DPR were dominated by perceptions of corruption, inefficiency and self-seeking behaviour. The first CDI Study should be read in conjunction with this paper and is available along with the new paper through the links below.

In October 2004, the second democratically elected DPR was sworn into office. But unlike the chamber elected in 1999, this DPR did not then meet as the Majelis Permusyawarahan Rakyat (MPR) and choose the President. Constitutional changes meant that the President had been chosen by the electorate in a direct popular election. The President was no longer answerable to the DPR but to the electorate. This reform fundamentally altered the relationship between the DPR and the Presidency, turning Indonesia from something of a hybrid parliamentary-presidential system into a more straightforward presidential style of government with a clearer separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches.

This paper was therefore commissioned to explore answers to two main questions. What, if anything, has changed about the structure and functioning of the DPR as an institution since the first CDI study of 2002? Specifically, have the new constitutional relationship between the branches of government in Indonesia changed the internal political dynamics of the DPR or changed the nature of the DPR's role in law and policy-making and in Indonesian politics in general?

Click on the first link below to access this paper by Dr Sherlock:

	PPS 2007/1: Stephen Sherlock - The Indonesian Parliament after Two Elections: What has Really Changed?
	Stephen Sherlock - Struggling to Change: The Indonesian Parliament in an Era of Reformasi , Centre for Democratic Institutions, Canberra , 2003.
	NEW: Launch of Indonesian version of this CDI Policy Paper

<The PPS 2007/1 Seminar held 4 May @ the ANU

Stephen Sherlock is a CDI Associate and a political analyst and development consultant, specialising in Indonesia and South and Southeast Asia. He worked for eleven years as an analyst and policy adviser on Indonesia and East Timor in the Australian Parliament, and now divides his time between Indonesia and Australia, as a consultant on governance and political change.